PipeLineNews Archives: May 2010

May 31, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Tiring of seeing alleged humanitarian aid being delivered to the Hamas government in Gaza by a rag-tag consortium of radical supporters, Israel this morning signaled its policy of silently bowing to skewed world public opinion had ended.

Sometime this morning IDF soldiers stormed aboard the six vessel flotilla seizing control of it from what was estimated to be hundreds of pro-Hamas terror supporters. At least 10 deaths have been confirmed with the toll potentially going higher.

Previous to the vessel sailing from Cypress, the Israeli government had repeatedly warned the activists that they would not be permitted to complete their intended journey.

As quoted by the Los Angeles Times [see, http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/middleeast/la-fg-israel-protesters-slain-20100531,0,2138270.story] Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Avalon referred to the aid effort an, "armada of hate and violence," that was engaging in a "premeditated and outrageous provocation."

During the operation IDF soldiers came under attack, taking incoming fire from the ships and being attacked by knife and club wielding protesters once aboard.

Two IDF soldiers were seriously injured as a result of the incident.

Indicating the severity of the brief confrontation, the official IDF press release tersely stated, "Navy fighters took control of six ships that tried to violate the naval blockade...During the takeover, the soldiers encountered serious physical violence by the protesters, who attacked them with live fire." [source, Haaretz, http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israeli-commandos-gaza-flotilla-crew-tried-to-lynch-us-1.293089]

Against the expected firestorm of protest from Europe [the pro-Hamas UN has called an "urgent" security session] the Israeli government held firm, indicating its full support of the operation.

Upon being notified of the action, prime minister Netanyahu, who had been meeting with government officials in Canada, cancelled a hastily scheduled press event by president Obama which had been designed to address the president's rapidly eroding support by American Jews and flew back to Israel.

In recent months team Obama has made no effort to disguise its displeasure with Netanyahu's strong anti-terror stance, forcing the prime minister after his last WH meeting to depart via the back door.

May 26, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - As reported by the Islam in Europe blog, planned demonstrations in Brussels by radical Muslims displeased by Belgium's move to ban certain Islamic head coverings - including that which is considered most extreme, the burqa - was not permitted to go forward by the country's law enforcement authorities.

The main group involved calls itself Sharia4Belgium/MuslimsRise. They advocate forcing Shari'a compliance throughout the West.

On April 22 the lower house of the Belgian parliament voted to require the ban.

Though the protests were not held in Brussels, supporters of the group protested in London. in front of the Belgian embassy.

A YouTube video posted by Sharia4Belgium/MuslimsRise carried the following message

"[sic] 22nd May 22010 Muslim's in the United Kingdom demonstrated regarding the 'Bann on the Veil" in Belgium. The Messenger Muhammad(saw) said 'this Ummah(nation) is one Ummah to the exclusion of all others: thie land is ONE, their war is ONE, thier peace is one & their Honour is One. any one of you can represent all of you'. Oh Allah(swt) creator of the heavens and earths except the efforts of the muslims in the UK. Ameen.'"

The incessant and rising push for Shari'a among Europe's Muslims is believed by many to foreshadow a similar effort in the United States, with the move by Islamists in New York to build a $100 million mosque in close proximity to the 911 ground zero site being only the most recent example.

Opponents of the plan were handed a setback on May 25 when a local community board went dhimmi, voting 29-1 in favor of the mosque. 10 abstained to vote on the controversial measure.

May 25, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - On February 13 at New York University, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, John Brennan, delivered a 34 minute address.

Brennan's remarks were made at an event entitled, "A Dialogue on our National Security" which was sponsored by the Islamic Center at NYU and the school's Islamic Law Student's Association. [see, White House website, Brennan Speaks at NYU]

Brennan was introduced by Dr. Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America [ISNA]1, an Islamist organization named as an unindicted co-conspirator in America's largest terror funding trial, U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation [HLF]. The trial, which resulted in the conviction of all of the defendants on a total of 108 charges, proved that HLF funneled over $12 million to the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas.2

"Prosecutors applied the label of 'unindicted co-conspirator' to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, and the North American Islamic Trust in connection with a trial planned in Texas next month for five officials of a defunct charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development." [source, New York Sun, June 4, 2007, Islamic Groups Named in Hamas Funding Case]

Brennan, acknowledging Mattson, thanked her "...for your leadership as an academic whose research continues the rich tradition of Islamic scholarship, and as the president of the Islamic Society of North America, where you have been a voice for the tolerance and diversity which defines Islam."

911 Families Oppose Ground Zero Mosque

May 24, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - The group - 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America, (9/11 FSSA) - has announced that it adamantly rejects the plan for a mosque to be built atop a planned 15-story structure that would tower over the site where nearly 3,000 people were killed by Islamic terrorists.

According to the project's leader, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the mosque and "Muslim-led community center" is to be called the Cordoba House, named after the historic period when the Islamic Caliphate in Cordoba ruled much of Europe and non-Muslims lived as second-class citizens under Islamic rule.

Victims' families view the imam's expressed plan to "leverage" the mosque's proximity to Ground Zero to engage in proselytizing and to "grow the Muslim community," as shockingly insensitive to the history of the site where their loved ones were slaughtered in the worst terrorist attack by extremist Muslims in America's history; following the attack, 20,000 body parts were recovered in a nine-month operation to remove 1.8 million tons of rubble from Lower Manhattan.

"Imam Rauf is a Muslim cleric who, immediately after 9/11, blamed the attacks on U.S. treatment of Muslims, asserting that Osama Bin Ladin was 'made in the U.S.A,'" said Debra Burlingame, co-founder of 9/11 FSSA, whose brother was the pilot of the American Airlines flight which was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon. "We do not accept the Cordoba organization's view that we need Imam Rauf to lecture us about religious tolerance in a city still dealing with the consequences of the attack that he claims we brought on ourselves."

Last Monday, representatives of 9/11 FSSA met with Sharif El-Gamal, owner and CEO of Soho Properties, the corporation that purchased the two buildings where the mosque will be built at 43-45 Park Place, and asked him to name the investors in the mosque project. Mr. El-Gamal refused, citing the advice of his attorneys, stating that "this is private property" and that "we can build this 'as of right.'" The property was purchased with $4.85 million in cash.

Imam Rauf is now publicly stating in a professionally-organized PR campaign that the building will be a community center, "not a mosque." However, Mr. El-Gamal showed 9/11 FSSA members architectural renderings in which a mosque, located on the top floor of the 15-story building, would have a commanding view of the entire Ground Zero neighborhood.

Equally troubling is the fact that, while the stated purpose of the project is to engage in interfaith dialogue and cultural egalitarianism, Imam Rauf embraces Shariah, the Arabic word for Islamic law, a sociopolitical system of jurisprudence based upon the Qur'an which supersedes man-made law and which rejects the Constitutional doctrine of the separation of church and state. Islamic countries that embrace Shariah and political Islam are known for brutal policies that discriminate against women, gays, and religious minorities. Shariah law is entirely incompatible with the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment and would violate 1st Amendment protections of speech, assembly and the free exercise of religion.

We feel that the attempt to use our loved ones' deaths and the painful legacy of 9/11 still felt by New Yorkers to engage in a campaign to reverse America's core doctrine of religious freedom - and to do so under the guise of interfaith understanding - is a gross insult to the memory of those who were killed on that terrible day.

911 Families Oppose Ground Zero Mosque

May 24, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - The group - 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America, (9/11 FSSA) - has announced that it adamantly rejects the plan for a mosque to be built atop a planned 15-story structure that would tower over the site where nearly 3,000 people were killed by Islamic terrorists.

According to the project's leader, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the mosque and "Muslim-led community center" is to be called the Cordoba House, named after the historic period when the Islamic Caliphate in Cordoba ruled much of Europe and non-Muslims lived as second-class citizens under Islamic rule.

Victims' families view the imam's expressed plan to "leverage" the mosque's proximity to Ground Zero to engage in proselytizing and to "grow the Muslim community," as shockingly insensitive to the history of the site where their loved ones were slaughtered in the worst terrorist attack by extremist Muslims in America's history; following the attack, 20,000 body parts were recovered in a nine-month operation to remove 1.8 million tons of rubble from Lower Manhattan.

"Imam Rauf is a Muslim cleric who, immediately after 9/11, blamed the attacks on U.S. treatment of Muslims, asserting that Osama Bin Ladin was 'made in the U.S.A,'" said Debra Burlingame, co-founder of 9/11 FSSA, whose brother was the pilot of the American Airlines flight which was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon. "We do not accept the Cordoba organization's view that we need Imam Rauf to lecture us about religious tolerance in a city still dealing with the consequences of the attack that he claims we brought on ourselves."

Last Monday, representatives of 9/11 FSSA met with Sharif El-Gamal, owner and CEO of Soho Properties, the corporation that purchased the two buildings where the mosque will be built at 43-45 Park Place, and asked him to name the investors in the mosque project. Mr. El-Gamal refused, citing the advice of his attorneys, stating that "this is private property" and that "we can build this 'as of right.'" The property was purchased with $4.85 million in cash.

Imam Rauf is now publicly stating in a professionally-organized PR campaign that the building will be a community center, "not a mosque." However, Mr. El-Gamal showed 9/11 FSSA members architectural renderings in which a mosque, located on the top floor of the 15-story building, would have a commanding view of the entire Ground Zero neighborhood.

Equally troubling is the fact that, while the stated purpose of the project is to engage in interfaith dialogue and cultural egalitarianism, Imam Rauf embraces Shariah, the Arabic word for Islamic law, a sociopolitical system of jurisprudence based upon the Qur'an which supersedes man-made law and which rejects the Constitutional doctrine of the separation of church and state. Islamic countries that embrace Shariah and political Islam are known for brutal policies that discriminate against women, gays, and religious minorities. Shariah law is entirely incompatible with the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment and would violate 1st Amendment protections of speech, assembly and the free exercise of religion.

We feel that the attempt to use our loved ones' deaths and the painful legacy of 9/11 still felt by New Yorkers to engage in a campaign to reverse America's core doctrine of religious freedom - and to do so under the guise of interfaith understanding - is a gross insult to the memory of those who were killed on that terrible day.

Congressman Frank Wolf Again Calls For Thorough Intel Review

May 20, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - On a note of concern attending the Tuesday release by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, of the declassified summary report on the failed Christmas Day bombing attempt by Umar Farouk Abdumutallab, Congressman Frank Wolf [R VA] once more called upon the administration to consider implementing a series of recommendations - arrived at in a show of bipartisanship - designed to improve national security.

In a letter to the president, the congressman pointed out that the 14 specific "points of failure" detailed within the report might well have been prevented if a thorough outside review of the nation's counterterrorism policies had already been completed.

Towards creation of the proposed review board - "Team B" - Mr. Wolf in January made specific recommendations which included:

1. Establishment of a 10-year term for the TSA administrator.

2. Co-locating the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group at the National Counterterrorism Center so as to foster interagency cooperation and information sharing.

3. Bringing the 9/11 Commission co-chairs, Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean back to thoroughly review intelligence performance since their original report was issued.

Wolf - a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee - stressed that the purpose of such a review was to use the benefit of hindsight towards devising a more effect counter-terror posture.

May 20, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Continuing the Pentagon's policy of micro-managing the war effort to its detriment, it has been reported by both Reuters and the Chicago Tribune that Army personnel stationed in Afghanistan are under investigation in the alleged non-combat related deaths of "possibly" three Afghan civilians.

"U.S. statement Thursday said the allegations also included illegal drug use, assault and conspiracy. No charges have been filed but one soldier has been placed in pre-trial confinement." [source, Chicago Tribune, US investigating allegations "small number" of US soldiers responsible for civilian deaths, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-as-afghan-us-probe,0,1187019.story?track=rss]

The move comes on the heels of the acquittal of three Navy SEALs, 2nd Class Matthew McCabe and Petty Officers Julio Huertas and Jonathan Keefe who were charged upon mere allegations made by a detained terrorist - Ahmed Hashim Abed - of criminal assault, dereliction of duty and impeding an official investigation.

The now proven unfounded "assault" consisted of an alleged slap delivered to the terrorist as he was taken into custody.

Chalk another one up for over enthusiastic JAGs.

Though these most recent charges may eventually prove entirely true, one wonders in a time of war how much micro-management our already stressed forces in Afghanistan can take and still function effectively.

Finding the balance between managing collateral damage in field operations and the need to maintain motivation is something the Pentagon had better seriously weigh if it intends the Afghan mission to be successful especially given the short time frame set for it by team Obama.

Random Thoughts on Upcoming California Primary

By CAMILLE GIGLIO, Legislative Analyst

May 19, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - We begin to get phone calls and questions about this time in an election cycle concerning who is a pro-life candidate. Unfortunately, the last few elections have left one scratching their head wondering who or if any of the candidates is really pro life.

This upcoming primary is no different. Not only do we wonder if any of them are really pro life, but we wonder if any of the information they put forth is even accurate, let alone germane to the office for which they are running.

I will be out of the state during the election time - yes, I'm voting absentee - so here are some random thoughts on candidate positions.

Governor's position

Met Whitman, during one of her last televised debates, labeled Steve Poizner as a darling of the pro aborts and herself as pro life. Further, she has distributed a 46 page publication entitled "Building a New California."

First of all, no federal taxpayer money comes into the California state coffers to pay for abortion, so the governor has never had to be concerned about that.

It doesn't matter how she personally, or any candidate running for governor, feels about federal funding of abortion.

Federal tax money does come into the state but it goes directly to the abortion industry, therefore bypassing the state's ability to control it. If she really was interested, she should as governor demand that the federal funds be paid to the state. In that way there would be reporting requirements to meet and accountability as to where and for what the federal tax money is being spent.

Federal tax money does come into the state to reimburse, in part, for family planning.

Perhaps she should mention that.

As to Steve Poizner's 100% Planned Parenthood rating, that occurred some years ago when he was running for another office. Though he does not appear to have refuted that they never endorsed him, they probably won't because they already have the Democrats all sewed up.

Another Meg mailer features the smiling face of former Governor Pete Wilson - who put state Supreme Court Justice Ming Chinn on the state supreme court. Chinn couldn't get up from the floor fast enough after kissing Wilson's feet for the appointment, to cast a vote against hearings on parental notification, thus assuring Planned Parenthood more state funding and privileges than even Jerry Brown did as governor.

As for Steve Poizner I am concerned about his stand favoring charter schools. Charter schools are government, tax funded entities which are presumed to allow a little flexibility and local control in their overseeing. In reality they function as new pathways, seducing religious schools into becoming charter schools, thus creating more specialized academies within the charter school program, a merger between education and labor.

Regardless of who gets to be Governor, should a Democrat win the position of Superintendent of Public Instruction, this arrangement will go ahead full speed, whether there is federal funding or not.

Regarding Jerry Brown as Democrat candidate for Governor, let's remember that it was he who in 1976 or thereabouts, told the feds that California would pay for all the abortions with California tax money because the state preferred not to take up its time in compiling reports to the feds on how they were spending the abortion dollars.

It was also he who appointed Rose Byrd to the state Supreme Court whereupon she took up the case of authorizing the minor consent law. This had the effect that minors, without parental involvement, could decide the outcome of a pregnancy by themselves.

US Senate Races

Carly Fiorina claims to be "proudly proudly pro life" What does that mean? No one, apparently, has asked her to qualify that claim.

Current state Assemblyman and U.S. Senate candidate, Chuck Devore has a known pro life voting record. Regardless, the state and National Pro Life Councils have endorsed pro life unknown, former HP exec Carly Fiorina, as have Sarah Palin and other supposedly noteworthy pro life Republicans.

The Susan B. Anthony list has endorsed Carly because they apparently only endorse pro life women regardless of their ability to run a government. Running a business no matter how large, is very different from running a state government.

One also wonders if the state Republican party would even support Devore if he wins the primary.

The pro life pac groups may believe that Carly makes a better showing against Barbara Boxer, and she certainly has more funding than Devore, but it may cause the pro life voter to stay home thereby throwing the Republican nomination to Tom Campbell.

Many say they don't care who gets in to the U.S. Senate seat, just so long as it's not Boxer, but in Campbell we have a candidate just like Boxer on this issue.

The other position I worry about is that of Superintendent of Public Instruction. There are something like 15 candidates for this top education job. Tom Torlakson is the Democrat favored candidate. He has hungered after this position for some time, authoring at the state level several bills that coincide with Obama's Race To The Top Education funding agenda.

There are so far, two candidate brochures put out by various pro life groups. Aside from the California Pro Life Council's survey which endorses Fiorina, there are the Orange County Pac's recommendations which are confusing arranged, listing Poizner as pro life.

And, finally, be aware of any parcel tax bonds or measures that claim that education is being shortchanged on funding - that just isn't so.

Souder Vs. Blumenthal, In Your Face Journalistic Malfeasance

By WILLIAM MAYER

May 19, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Much has been written over the past few years categorically establishing beyond question the leftist bias of the entrenched media [see for daily coverage, the Media Research Center, especially its Special Reports section, http://www.mrc.org/specialreports/archive.aspx, or any number of books including Bernie Goldberg's, "Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News"]

Understandably the media will never admit to this, regardless of how thoroughly the phenomenon is documented, another test suggesting the presence of bias and an inability to accept reality.

I have found this to be the case in dozens and dozens of off-the-record, deep background chats with journalists who simply will not admit that they are frequently nothing more than purveyors of agendized leftist propaganda.

One such conversation comes to mind in which I challenged a prominent West coast reporter - during a telephone conversation - over coverage of a speech by a key member of the G.W. Bush administration. After wrangling for several minutes over the article's almost complete failure to mention anything that this former official said during his address, this reporter finally admitted, not bias, but to the creation of a story - a controversy - where none existed because otherwise, "it wasn't news." This - translated - means it's not news unless it fits the working narrative and if it doesn't, then it will be bludgeoned into correct form.

Since I had a representative at this event I was fully aware that during the Q & A, rather than queries directed at particular aspects of the book he was pushing, instead he was continually challenged by this reporter, very aggressively, to explain what was then and remains now a small so-called "scandal" within the GOP that had absolutely nothing to do with him, his book or the previous administration.

The intent of course was to present the GOP in a poor light and hew to the central core principle of leftist activism, that being, "the issue is never the issue...the issue is always the revolution."

With this in mind let's take a brief look at the New York Times' 5/19 reportage regarding Tuesday's primary elections [see, http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/index.html?hp&hp]. Specifically we will look at the way in which two genuine scandals were presented.

The first involves the case of Indiana Republican Congressman Mark Souder who was caught with his pants down, admitting to an affair with a staffer [presumably female] and making the decision to resign [see, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/politics/19souder.html?ref=politics].

The article entitled, Citing Affair, Republican Gives Up House Seat, was written by Carl Hulse. Its first sentence starts with, "Representative Mark Souder, a conservative Republican from Indiana..."

So we have Souder identified as a member of the GOP in the title as well as the intro sentence, which also nails down that Souder is a [shudder] "conservative" - though apparently not so much of a social-conservative it seems.

Eight times in this piece the word Republican is mentioned and twice the word [double shudder] conservative.

No doubt Mr. Souder is a scoundrel, though his forthrightness in admitting the affair and then promptly resigning are mitigating factors attesting to at least some aspect of correctly formed moral principle.

Next we turn to the Times' coverage [see, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/nyregion/19veterans.html?ref=politics ] of a different kind of scandal, one involving lying on the part of a Senatorial candidate from Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, who misrepresented on numerous occasions his military record, suggesting that he had served in Vietnam.

The title of the piece - written by Michael Barbaro and David M. Halbfinger - is far from as accusatory than the Souder piece, Colleague Says Blumenthal Claims Grew in Time.

The first sentence from the piece is as follows, "Former Representative Christopher Shays of Connecticut found it puzzling: over time, his friend Attorney General Richard Blumenthal kept revising how he talked about his military service..."

Please note that Christopher Shays left Congress under a cloud of scandal himself involving serious financial impropriety. In a May 30, 2009 piece [see, http://www.ctpost.com/default/article/Shays-scandal-may-be-worse-223998.php ] in the Connecticut Post, written by Neil Vigdor we read, Embezzlement scandal Shays Scandal May be Worse, with the lead sentence, "The embezzlement scandal that enveloped Christopher Shays' failed 2008 re-election campaign is far more extensive than has been previously reported - probably reaching back into previous Shays campaigns, the former congressman told Greenwich Time."

Perhaps the NY Times considers financial impropriety on this scale to be a resume enhancement for people it chooses to quote, at least that would justify the papers' inclusion of Shays in this piece.

Getting back to Mr. Blumenthal, who radiates all the warmth of an embalmer, the Times' coverage is mild indeed, even noting - as expiation for Blumie's actions - "There is a lot of anecdotal evidence of this phenomenon of exaggerating military service by people who feel nostalgic because they missed their war," said Brian McAllister Linn, a professor at Texas A&M University who specializes in military history."

Yes mere exaggeration, it happens all the time to non-war heroes such as Blumie.

Reading through the piece we find the only mention of Blumie's political affiliation - Democrat - hidden 9 paragraphs [and 310 words] into the piece, "At a news conference on Tuesday in West Hartford, where he was surrounded by veterans, Mr. Blumenthal, 64, a Democratic candidate for Senate, said he had never intended to mislead the public."

There is no use of the words lie or lying in the article at all, though that is clearly what happened and the way the story is constructed, Blumie's fabrication seems to be, by the Times' standards, perhaps his best qualification for high office.

So we have in these opposing presentations by the New York Times, on the same day and about similar matters of trustworthiness to serve in Congress; completely disparate and biased treatment.

There really is no new bottom line here, the old media is comprised of leftists and they unabashedly served their leftist demi-god, facts and representations be damned. Their cheerleading in print, on the air and on the 'Net is as ceaseless as it is shamelessly obvious.

The public has already tired of such ridiculous slanting of news presentations and this is reflected in falling subscriptions and viewership for the lefty press.

As the mid-term elections loom, be prepared for this to reach a crescendo which will not be abated even as the press tries to put the best face on the carnage that will be plainly on view on the morning after the voters speak. One remembers the famous Monty Python scene, "Duel in the Black Forest" where the hapless Black Knight having had three appendages chopped off by King Arthur [how do you know he is king? "he's the one who doesn't have shit all over him."] scoffs at his grievous injuries and remarks, "Let's call it a draw."

Out of Africa: illegal immigrants, crime, terrorism, aids and polygamy

The Al-Qaeda Threat From Africa

By EMERSON VERMAAT

May 18, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Eachyear, more than 240,000 illegal African immigrants are entering Europe. Behindthese huge operations of migrant trafficking are powerful criminal African andNorth African organizations which bribe the police, customs officials and otherlocal officials as well as (African) government ministers. Each illegalimmigant has to pay up to 3000 euros to the trafficking organizations. Thesemafia organizations receive some 300 million dollars (237 million euros)annually for their clandestine services (bribing of officials, documentforgery, etc.), according to a United Nations report. Many of these organizationsare run by Nigerians, the report says.[1]

Nigeria and Somalia aresignificant source countries of criminals and terrorists who operate on aninternational scale. Hundreds of thousands of Nigerian and Somali immigrantshave entered Europe and North America in recent years, posing great strains onWestern societies. Western intelligence and security services are monitoringradicalized African Muslim males who enthousiastically endorse jihadistideologies linked to Al-Qaeda. An increasing number of them even wants to jointhe jihad against the West and die as a suicide bomber or so-called martyr."